2006 Poll - Executive Summary

Executive Summary

In January and February, the Statistical Consulting Service (SCS) in the Department of Statistics conducted the web-based Technology Poll, which contained a subset of questions commissioned by the Office of the Chief Information Officer. This annual omnibus survey provides data that is used by many departments for strategic planning in developing and assessing programs and services.

Selection Process
Human Resources randomly selected a total of 2,000 faculty and staff, excluding clinical faculty, from its database for sampling. The Office of the Registrar randomly selected 4,200 graduate students and 5,000 undergraduate students from the Columbus campus. The final breakdown on completed questionnaires was 415 faculty, 406 staff, 1024 graduate student, and 838 undergraduate students.

Faculty and staff with Columbus campus addresses received letters notifying them of the survey and advising them that they would receive an e-mail in a few days directing them to the survey web site. Each letter was personalized and told recipients what address the e-mail would be sent to and its subject line. Notification letters were not sent to students.

Sampled individuals received invitation e-mails at their published OSU e-mail address that explained the survey and included a uniquely coded URL link to the web survey questionnaire. This code made it possible to track response and reduced the chance of unsampled individuals completing a questionnaire. Students were entered in a drawing for one of four Apple iPods to boost their participation.

Response and Error Rate
The faculty response rate was 20.8%. In theory, in 19 of 20 cases, the results for this faculty sample will differ due to sampling error by no more than 4.8 percentage points in either direction from what would have been obtained by interviewing all faculty in the population. The response rate for staff was 20.3%, and the margin of sampling error was 4.8 percentage points in either direction from what would have been obtained by interviewing all staff in the population. The response rate for graduate students was 24.4%, and the margin of sampling error was 3.0 percentage points in either direction from what would have been obtained by interviewing all graduate students on the Columbus campus. The response rate for undergraduate students was 16.8%, and the margin of sampling error was 3.4 percentage points in either direction from what would have been obtained by interviewing all undergraduate students on the Columbus campus. In addition to sampling error, all surveys are subject to other potential sources of imprecision and bias which may be associated with the question wording and/or ordering, and the response rate, which could lead to somewhat different results from the present findings.

Non-participation and Use of Incentives
Non-participation in surveys is a growing problem. The goal of the notification letter sent to faculty and staff was to increase participation by making faculty and staff aware that they would receive the e-mail survey invitation. The use of Apple iPods as incentives was also intended to increase participation among students. Both of these techniques appear to have worked to a small degree. A major obstacle to higher participation rates for web surveys may be associated with the mode itself. Many individuals have more than one e-mail address and they may prefer an e-mail address that is not in the Human Resources database. Less preferred e-mail addresses may not be forwarded to preferred addresses and may be checked only occasionally or not at all. Software filters may identify e-mail survey invitations as spam; individuals may be reluctant to open e-mails from sources unknown to them.

Poll Categories
The CIO Office prepared this analysis of its 2006 poll results. Poll questions reviewed below fall into these categories: general satisfaction with CIO services; type, number, and connections for personal computing devices; and use of instructional technologies

Survey Rationale
The data collected from the OSU Technology Poll are used as metrics to help benchmark progress on the implementation of the university's technology strategic plan (PlanIT) and to capture performance indicators for the budget guidance process. The findings derived from the survey continue to indicate a general satisfaction with services offered by the Offices of CIO; however, campus awareness of CIO communications and initiatives remain an issue.

 

Computers, Internet Access and Instructional Technologies

Computer Ownership and Internet Access
Trends in personally owned multiple computing devices reveal almost universal access to personal computers in the residence among faculty, graduate, and undergraduate students. Staff trails only slightly behind. Sixty-seven percent of the faculty have access to a second home computer (up 6% from the previous year), as do 49% of the graduate/professional students up 2%), 33% of the undergraduate students (down 5%), and 41% of the staff (a slight decrease from the 44% reported the previous year). Respondents in all groups showed an overwhelming preference for Windows PC platforms, strongest among undergraduate (94%), graduate/professional students (92%), staff (89%) and then faculty (75%). Connectivity to the university network from home increased somewhat from the past year with more than 92% of the OSU community (up from 88% in 2005) connecting via several different Internet Service Providers (ISPs); the data showed a continuing shift from dial-up service to high-speed, broadband providers.

Computer Lab Use
Although the 2002 PlanIT Customer Satisfaction Survey noted students want more lab seats and longer hours, 77% of the undergraduates (up from 73% reported in 2005) and 72% of the graduate/professional students (down from 81% reported last year) report using the on-campus computer labs fewer than ten hours week. In general, use of university computer labs above 10 hours per week remained unchanged for both populations in 2006, with the exception that use among graduate/professional students, who report a 5% increased of use to between 10-20 hours per week.

Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs)
PDAs were used more among faculty (38% compared to 40% in 2005) than the other three groups, which indicated somewhat less use ranging from 29% for staff to 20% for graduate/professional students and13% for undergraduates. However, the overall use of this type of technology within the university community decreased by 3% during the past year to 25%. There was also an net 4% increase of PDAs with wireless network connection to 32% among all four groups, with the widest use among undergraduates (44%, compared to 35% in 2005) followed by faculty (33% compared 28% in 2005), graduate/professional students (30%, down from 32% the previous year) and staff usage was 29% (basically unchanged from the 28% reported in the previous year's survey).

Instructional Technologies
Generally, faculty use of instructional technologies has slightly widened in the past year, with approximately half of the respondents reporting the use of this technology in nearly every class. However, 12% of the faculty indicated never using instructional technologies during the previous autumn quarter, unchanged from the 2005 poll. Eighty-five percent of faculty said that the most important consideration in implementing technology was an ease of use without the need for technical support. Access to software, equipment and Internet-ready classrooms was almost as important consideration for implementing instructional technology and the second most cited incentive (75%, down from 81% in 2005). Help and support available to use instructional technology remained a lesser concern in 2005 (53%, remaining unchanged from the 54% in 2005), while only 38% of the faculty (36% noted in 2005) continued to focus on maintaining intellectual property when developing instructional technologies). Rewards for using instructional technology continued to remain least important (27%, down somewhat from 29% in 2005).

Among students, undergraduates indicated that 41% of their courses incorporated instructional technologies in nearly every classroom, a somewhat higher level than what graduate/professional students report (34%). Compared to the previous year's polling, undergraduates expressed about the same interest in online classes (35%, basically unchanged from 36% in the previous year's poll) and graduate/professional students' interest also remained unchanged at 21% v. 23% reported in 2005. Although the use information technology in the delivery courses remains an important consideration for both student populations, 62% of the undergraduates (up from 58% in 2005) and 67% of the graduate/professional students (unchanged from 2005) prefer face-to-face instruction as their primary mode for instructional delivery.

 

General Satisfaction with CIO Services

Twelve percent of the faculty report being very satisfied with Office of the CIO's instructional support services, down from the 19% reported in the 2005 polling. Over half of the faculty (49%) are very satisfied to somewhat satisfied with these support services provided through TELR and OIT. Only 11% of the faculty reported being unsatisfied with the services (compared to 13% in 2004) and 40% reported not using the services.

Approximately half of all the university expressed satisfaction with the communications produced by the Office of the CIO (e.g. Guide to Services, Orientation handouts, and CIO, TELR, and OIT Web Sites) to keep informed about technology-related events and services on campus (faculty 50%; followed by 49% of the staff, 47% of the graduate/professional students and 44% undergraduates). Overall, two-thirds or more of the respondents felt that Instructional Technology resources at OSU met their technology needs (79% undergraduates, 74% graduate/professional, 70% staff and 62% faculty). These responses are much the same as the previous year; with the exception for an 8% increase for the staff.

Information Technology Support Resources and Services
The majority of the university community surveyed in 2006 approved of IT services on campus. The question was revised in 2005 changing the option from satisfied to very satisfied to somewhat satisfied to very satisfied, (with 89% of the graduate/professional somewhat satisfied to very satisfied, followed by 85% for both the undergraduates students and staff and faculty and 78% faculty indicating satisfaction). Noteworthy were the few faculty who either strongly agreed or agreed that IT was a factor in coming to OSU (less than 3%, down from 6% for the past three years) or a factor for remaining at OSU (14% remaining the same for the previous year). The poll results indicate that two-thirds of the faculty (67%, up from 58% in 2005), staff (68%, somewhat down from 72% from the previous year) and graduate/professional students (60%, up from 57%) were somewhat satisfied (revised from "satisfied" in 2004) or very satisfied with the helpfulness and responsiveness of IT support. Less than half of the undergraduates (47%, up from 39% from 2005) responded similarly. Since this item was first included in the 2003 poll, faculty, staff and graduate/professional student responses have remained somewhat constant; however, undergraduate students have continued to indicate somewhat less satisfaction with the IT support services over the same period.

With regard to central OSU e-mail services, not the individual college or department service, almost three-quarters of the university community report being somewhat satisfied to very satisfied. Eighty-one percent of the undergraduates report being very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with central e-mail services followed by graduate/professional students and staff (71%) and then faculty (70%). The findings tracked similarly for the four population's responses to general overall level of satisfaction for IT at OSU. Notable were the differences between undergraduates who were familiar or very familiar (40% v. 51% in 2005) with the IT resources on campus compared to the 29% graduate/professional student population (up somewhat from 24% in 2005), followed by 27% staff (down from 30% last year) and faculty (25%, down from 34% reported in 2005). Yet, each of the surveyed groups believes that campus' Information Technology resources generally meet their technology needs.

Security and privacy remain two areas of marked interest in the 2006 campus poll. Overall, security of their electronic data continues to remain a serious concern among faculty. Almost three-quarters of the faculty were either somewhat concerned (47%) or very concerned (30%) regarding data security (compared to the 45% indicating being somewhat or 29% very concerned in 2005). Additionally, three-fourths of the faculty expressed various levels of concern about the privacy of their communications, with 38% being very concerned (in contrast to 35% in 2005) and 40% somewhat concerned, unchanged from 2005).

 

Type, Number, and Connections for Personal Computing Devices

Home Computers
As noted in past several years, home computing has become ubiquitous. Almost all faculty, graduate/professional, undergraduates and staff have access to personal computers in the home (99%, 99%, 99%, and 93% respectively in 2006 compared to 99%, 98%, 98%, and 93% for the same groups in 2005).

Some differences in type and number of computers continue to be found between faculty and students. Among the respondents reporting local residence or home computer use, laptop use grew significantly as the primary computer among three of the four campus populations: 58% of graduate/professionals, 49% of undergraduates and 45% for faculty (compared to 53%, 35%, and 36% respectively from the previous year). Staff home use of laptops increased somewhat from at 28% from 2006, up from 24% in 2005. The platform for the primary home computer (desktop or laptop) remains overwhelmingly Windows PC (94% undergraduates, 90% graduate/professionals, 89% for staff and 75% among faculty). Macintosh computers are used by only 23% of the faculty, unchanged from 2005) as their primary platform. In the other groups, Macintosh platforms account for significantly smaller percentages of the home computer environment and remained fundamentally unchanged from the previous year for staff (10%), graduate/professional students (9%) and undergraduates (5%).

Secondary Computers
Having a secondary computer at home is commonplace among many members of university community. Sixty-seven percent of the faculty, 49% of graduate/professionals, 41% of the staff and 33% of undergraduates report having access to two or more computers at home in 2006 (compared to 61%, 49%, 41%, and 38% respectively in 2005).

Secondary computers were laptops for 49% of faculty, 43% of the graduate/professionals students, 42% of undergraduates, and 37% of staff. The use of laptops as the second computer at home remained essentially unchanged among all four groups. Use of wireless connections for secondary computers continued to increase across the university community: faculty (60% v. 53% in 2005), undergraduates (62% v. 54% in 2005) while wireless connections are used by over half of the graduate/professional students (56% v. 43% in 2005), and slightly less than half the staff (45% compared to 42% the previous year).

As with the primary computers, the platform for secondary computers remains overwhelmingly Windows, with Macintosh platforms being used in numbers similar to its use on one's primary computer (faculty 20%; staff 12%, graduate/professional students 6% and undergraduates 4%).

Internet Service Provider for Home Computers
Between 1999 and 2006, ISP use from home has steadily increased and the responses show a modest increase over last year. From 1999 to 2002, the percentage of respondents reporting use of an ISP to connect to the university network was 78%, 80%, 82%, 88%, respectively and connectivity has remained at 88% since 2002. However, in 2006, 92% of the university community report having an ISP to connect to campus from their local residence. Use of Roadrunner for connection increased from 19% in 2001 to 38% last year and up to 42% in 2006. HomeNet (45% in 1999, down to 4% this year) and dial-up services (at 23% in 2006, 22% last year and 42% in 2003) both declined in use, eclipsed by high-speed, broadband service (62% in 2006, up from 52%, last year and 45% in 2003) as the primary connection to the university network. Additionally, there was a significant difference among the four groups not having an ISP, with 7% overall reporting no home connection to OSU, down from 12% in 2005. While only 3% of the undergraduates (down from the 6% reported last year) and 7% of graduate/professional students (up from 11% in 2005) lack a home connection to the university network, only 4% of the faculty (down from 9% last year and 14% in 2004) and staff continue to lag somewhat behind the other groups (16% in 2006, down from 20% reported last year and 27% in 2004).

Ninety percent of undergraduates report having a home ISP prior to coming to OSU (down slightly from 93% reported last year, but up significantly from 78% in 2002); 67% retained this service (unchanged from last year). Seventy-six percent of graduate students report having a home ISP prior to coming to OSU (basically unchanged from 75% reported last year, but a significant change from 59% in 2002); 85% retained the service (an increase of 18% over last year).

All populations report a slight increase in connectivity from the previous year; however, staff continued to trail all groups in access to an ISP (16% still lack a home ISP to connect to campus), but significantly improved from 37% reporting no home connectivity in 2001 and 20% in 2005. Faculty, made the most gains in this area, with a 5% increase in connectivity (only 4% lacking a home ISP compared to 9% in 2005). Undergraduate students remain the most connected (only 3% did not have an ISP in 2006 compared to 6% in 2005). Graduate students follow closely with 7% not having an ISP in 2006, a slight decline from 11%% last year.

Of those who do connect to the university network from home, the hourly usage varied according to population. Undergraduates (50%) and graduate/professional students (47%) lead in hours connected from home, reporting more than 20 hours per week (up from 51% and 40% respectively reported in 2005). On average, 32% of the faculty reported connectivity over 20 hours per week to a home ISP and staff reporting the least hours (23%, although up from 19% reported in 2005).

Computer Lab Use by Students
Computer lab use was reported at fewer than ten hours per week for 77% of the undergraduates (up from 73% from 2005) and 72% of the graduates (down from 81% last year). An additional 18% (a slight decrease from 20% in 2005) of the undergraduates and 17% of graduate/professional students (up from 12% from last year) report use of labs between 10 and 20 hours per week. Labs were used between 21 and 60 hours per week by 5% undergraduates and 8% of the graduate students. Less than 1% percent undergraduates and 2% of the graduate/professional students report computer lab use above 60 hours per week use.

Viruses, Virus protection, and Firewalls
In 2006, 20% of the faculty experienced viruses (significantly down from the 33% reported in 2005 and substantially lower than the 58% noted in 2002), compared with 51% of the undergraduates (60% reported in 2005), 34% of graduates (compared to 45% in 2005) and 23% of staff (down from 40% reported in last year). These findings represent a considerable improvement over the previous year, yet the current level of viruses remains problematic and may be attributed to individuals either still not installing or failing to update their anti-virus software. Among the students surveyed, a significant number of viruses were experienced on personal computers (undergraduates 46% and graduate/professional students 25% (down from 54% and 31% respectively reported in 2005 by these two student groups), although these same populations experienced almost no viruses on computers in university-owned facilities (undergraduates 2% and graduate/professional students 4%). This finding likely reflects the virus protection programs and controls placed on computers located in campus computer labs. Twelve percent of the faculty and 11% of the staff experienced viruses on their personal computers in 2006 (down slightly from 13% that faculty and 15% staff reported last year). Similar to the student populations, both faculty (6%) and staff (7%) experienced fewer viruses on OSU computers. Almost all survey respondents have an anti-virus program installed on most primary computers at home (faculty 91%, graduate/professional students and staff 90%, and 89% of the undergraduates). Collectively, within the university community, 36% use personal firewalls, down from 42% reported in 2005.

Awareness and Use of OSU Wireless Network
Added to the 2006 Technology Poll was a group of questions regarding the campus community's awareness and use of the wireless network. The OSU Wireless Project rolled out September 2005 with nearly 200 existing wireless hotspots available in over 60 buildings and key student gathering areas on campus. The majority of undergraduates (82%), graduate/professional students (79%), faculty (73%) and staff (65%) indicate being aware of the wireless network. However, few of these individuals had actually activated an account since the 2005 rollout: graduate/professional students (30%), undergraduates (28%), faculty (24%), and staff (14%). Even fewer members of the campus community with an activated account are using this resource: graduate/professional students (25%), undergraduates (20%), faculty (16%) and staff (11%).

Awareness and Use of OIT System Awareness Webpage
Another addition to the 2006 Poll was a question assessing the campus community's awareness of the Office of Information Technology (OIT) System Status Webpage monitoring e-mail, Carmen, authentication, People Soft, college, or department services. Fifty-one percent of the undergraduates are aware of this resource followed by graduate/professional students (47%), faculty (44%) and staff (43%).

Awareness and Use of OIT Anti-Spam Service
In the fall of 2005, OSU implemented an anti-spam filtering technology to reduce and block increasing amounts of commercial junk e-mail before it reaches the central server. Awareness of the anti-spam service on the central e-mail system to filter spam from the osu.edu mailbox was assessed as well as perception of its benefits in reducing unwanted e-mail. Sixty-one percent of the faculty and 59% of the staff are aware of the anti-spam service compared to 34% of the graduate/professional students and 25% of the undergraduates. Responding to its perceived effectiveness in reducing unwanted e-mail, 37% of faculty and staff agree it is helpful compared to 25% of the graduate/professional students and 21% of the undergraduates.

Use of Handheld and Wireless Devices
This year, the overall use of handhelds decreased on campus to 25% from 28% in 2005 (compared with16% in 2001); however this falls within the margin of error for the survey. Presently, 38% of the faculty indicate the use of handhelds (an increase from 24% over the past six years), but down 2% from 2005. Among graduate/professional students, 20% used handheld devices (down from 27% last year) and for undergraduates, 13% (down from 17% last). There was basically no change in use among staff (29% in 2006, 28% reported the previous year).

Use of PDAs with wireless network connections increased slightly to 32% from the 29% reported in 2005, (up from 21% reported in 2001), with undergraduates reporting the highest percentage of wireless PDA connectivity in 2006 (44%), followed by faculty (33%), graduate/professional students (30%), and then staff (27%). With the exception of graduate/professional students, PDA use with wireless network connections increased for those same populations from the 2005 poll (undergraduate use rose from 35% to 44%, faculty use increased by 3% to 33% and staff 26% to 27% in 2006).

 

Use of Instructional Technologies

In an effort to continue to benchmark future trends on the use instructional technologies and Informational Technologies (IT), new or revised questions in the 2005 poll remained unchanged. Also, the questions added to the 2002 survey on IT use, and repeated in 2003, became part of this year's comparative analysis.

 

Faculty Use of Instructional Technologies

About two-thirds of the faculty strongly agreed or agreed that current instructional technology environment supports their teaching or instruction (59% v. 64% in 2005) compared to a 70% favorable response of graduate students either strongly agreed or agreed, unchanged from last year. Faculty generally strongly agreed or agreed (76%, up somewhat from 73% in 2005) that OSU computing and electronic resources can be accessed from their lab or office compared with 60% that strongly agreed or agreed the same resources also can be accessed from home (57% reported in 2005). Additionally, 58% of the faculty either strongly agreed or agreed that IT helped increase their impact or productivity (compared to 59% in 2005 and down from 67% in 2004). Over two-thirds of the faculty (69%) either strongly agreed or agreed that being able to use Information Technology contributes to their professional development (basically unchanged from 67% in 2005, but down from 81% reported in 2004).

Nearly half of the faculty (48%) report using new instructional technologies (e.g., the World Wide Web, lab simulations, PowerPoint presentations or other distance learning technologies) in nearly every class session, compared to 50% in 2005, 39 % 2004, 44% in 2003, 38% in 2002 and 25% in 2001. An additional 15% confirm the use of instructional technologies in several class sessions, compared to 13% in 205, 26% in 2004, 18% in 2003, 23% in 2002 and 21% in 2001. Those who report never using these tools remained unchanged from last year's 12% and 8% reported in 2004 and represent a significant drop from 33% in 1999. E-mail remains the most widely used instructional technology (87%), followed by online syllabus and other handouts (74%), web-based materials (69%) and then computer-projected materials (63%). These technologies remain the most commonly used instructional support strategies as noted during the past four years. Further, approximately two-thirds of the faculty strongly agreed or agreed that IT was important to their students' success (63%, up slightly from the 60% reported in 2005, but down from 76% reported in 2004 and 68% in 2003). Somewhat expected, most faculty also either strongly agreed (30% in 2006, down from 35% in 2005 v. 33% in 2004 and 34% in 2003) or agreed (47 in 2006, up from 41% in 2005 v. 45% 2004 and 46% in 2003) that majors in their discipline should be required to demonstrate a certain level of knowledge regarding computer applications in their discipline.

Twelve percent of the faculty using the CIO Office's instructional support services provided through TELR and the Office of Information Technology (compared to 19% reported in 2005 and 22% in 2004) were very satisfied. Further, the faculty's overall level of satisfaction (very satisfied or satisfied) with the instructional support services seemed to decline during the past three years (49% reported in 2006 v. 53% in 2005 and 63% in 2004). Eight percent were somewhat dissatisfied (compared to 11% in the previous year) with the instructional support services and only 3% responded not satisfied. Forty percent of the faculty reported not using the services, up from 33% from the previous year.

Rated by faculty very important considerations or as important in their decision to implement instructional technology in their classes was ease of use (85%, basically unchanged from 84% in 2005), access to software equipment and network (75% in 2005 v. 81% last year and 75% in 2004), help and support to use instructional technologies (53% in 2005 v. 54% last year and 57% in 2004), maintaining ownership of the intellectual property developed within the context of instruction (38% in 2005 v. 36% last year and 40% in 2004), followed by rewards for using instructional technologies (27% in 2005 v. 29% last year and 20% in 2004).

Of the 364 valid faculty responses received, 193 or 53% report using a university-supported course management system, either Carmen or WebCT, (an increase from 40% in 2005 and up significantly from 16% in 2002), 171 or 47% (down from 69% in 2005 and 79% in 2002) reported not using a CMS. Among the most frequently reasons among the faculty in the survey for not using WebCT or another course management system, 25% had no time for development, 17% use their own course website, 15% believe it doesn't suit their course needs, 11% did not know how to get started, 8% did not know what a course management system is, and 8% were waiting for Carmen. Fourteen faculty (8%) provided a variety of other reasons and only two faculty (1%) were non-respondents.

The poll included other questions to better understand what assistance faculty need in adding these technologies to their classes. Unchanged from 2003, approximately one quarter of the faculty are very concerned with the time it takes to learn and use technology (27%, down from 32% last year, but still higher that 21% indicated in 2003) or somewhat concerned (40%, only up slightly from 37% in 2005, but down from 45% in 2003). This finding may be offset with 42% of the faculty who report having much of what is needed to learn and use technology (basically unchanged from 45% last year) and the 10% having everything needed to learn and use technology (9% reported in 2005).

In 2005 faculty were asked again about the ways that would be of interest in learning about instructional technology. In descending order, faculty cite the following ways most often: hands-on workshops with instructor (48%) and self instruction (48%), followed by self-paced tutorials (47%), cohort workshops (41%) online workshops (38%) and then one-on-one mentoring (35%). Hands-on workshops, tutorials and self-instruction were also the most frequently selected formats for learning about technology in 2005.

For the past six years, faculty have been asked if given adequate support, would you be interested in offering a fully online, distance education course? Faculty responses continue to reflect a steady decline on their desire to offer online/distance education courses. Of the 364 faculty polled in 2006, 26% expressed interest (unchanged from last year, but down from 34% noted the previous year, 38% in 2003 and 44% reported in 2002), 44% responded they would not (a slight change from the 48% response in 2005, but significantly down from 59% in 2004 and 2003), and 25% indicated uncertainty or did not know (compared to 22% in 2005).

 

Student Use of Instructional Technologies

Both graduate/professional students (98%) and undergraduates (97%) overwhelmingly feel that information technology is either very important in their education (graduate/professional students 77% v. 80% in 2005 and undergraduates 74% v. 77% the previous year) or somewhat important (undergraduates 23% v. 16% in 2005 and graduate/professional students compared to 21% v. 19% last year). Eighty-six percent of the undergraduate and 83% of the graduate/professional students strongly agreed or agreed that use of information technology makes them marketable to future employers. More students strongly agreed or agreed than in previous years that the use of IT help make them more likely to succeed in their future academic work, most students (87% undergraduates v. 75% in 2005 and 83% of the graduate/professional students v. 76% in 2005).

Of the undergraduate and graduate/professional student polled respondents in 2006, 91% of the undergraduates (compared to 87% in 2005) and 74% of the graduate/professional students (compared to 68% in 2005) report taking courses that incorporated instructional technology in their classes during the past autumn quarter. Forty-one percent of the undergraduates (basically unchanged from the 40% noted during the past two previous year's polls) and 34% of the graduate/professional students (compared to 33% in 2005 and 30% the previous year) report having instructors incorporate instructional technology in nearly every class. An additional 33%of the undergraduates had several classes that utilized instructional technology (compared to 27% in 2005 and 30% reported the prior year) compared to 23% of the graduate/professional students (unchanged from the two previous years). Only 6% on the undergraduates and 13% of the graduate/professional students report enrollment in courses that never incorporated instructional technology, basically unchanged from responses over the past three year's polls. As noted in previous three years data analysis, given that, for the most part, graduate and professional students likely enroll in focused areas of study rather than in university-wide study, the finding speaks to program level adoption for use of instructional technologies.

One-third of the undergraduate and graduate/professional students indicate interest in taking fully online classes for undergraduates (35%, basically unchanged from 36% in 2005 v. 23% reported in 2004, 32% in 2003 and down from 41% in 2001), while graduate/professional students responses have remained practically constant for the past four years (21% indicated interest in fully online courses in 2006 v. 23% in 2005 and 2004, 24% in 2003 and down from 36% in 2002). Interest in partly online courses increased for both groups with undergraduates responding 44% (compared to a 51% response last year v. 38% reported in 2004 and 44% in 2003, but down from 55% in 2002) and 34% of the graduate/professional students (compared to 38% reported in 2005, up from 33% in 2004, 30% in 2003, but down from 43% in 2002). In 2006, over 60% of the students indicate being "primarily interested in face-to-face classes," with undergraduates 62% (58% preferred face-to-face classes last year, down from 79% in 2004) compared to 67% of the graduate/professional students (unchanged from 2005, but down from 77% the previous year and 85% reported in 2003.